From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Furniss Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:14:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [LARTC] Patch to allow for the ATM "cell tax" Message-Id: <4416C1B9.4050106@dsl.pipex.com> List-Id: References: <1141284603.10264.168.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> In-Reply-To: <1141284603.10264.168.camel@ras.pc.brisbane.lube> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org Russell Stuart wrote: > On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 13:09 -0500, Jason Boxman wrote: > >>I finally patched my 2.6.15.5 kernel last night and use Stuart's userspace >>`tc` patch and I'm up and running. So far, things are working extremely >>well and exceeding my expectations. I only wish I actually knew my PPPoATM >>overhead, but my modem won't share. :) (I settled on the highest overhead >>number provided by Stuart in this thread, although I couldn't match them up >>with the numbers presented in your thesis' ATM overhead summary values so >>I'm confused.) > > > My calculations in that email were wrong for PPPoA - as > someone else pointed out. This is how I calculated it for > PPPoA: > > PPP overhead = 2 > ATM AAL5 SAR overhead = 4 > ----- > 6 I would say 2 + 8 = 10 for pppoa/vc mux Andy. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc